The defendant shall be innocent.

2. The summary of the facts charged is the person subject to enlistment in active duty service.

On November 15, 2016, the Defendant received a written notice of enlistment in active duty service under the name of the director of the regional military manpower office, to enlist in the army training center on December 12, 2016, from the Defendant’s dwelling place in Sungnam-si Branch apartment B apartment and C, Sungnam-si, Sungnam-si, and the Defendant’s dwelling place in the army training center on December 12, 2016, but did not enlist without justifiable grounds within three days from the date

3. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged on the ground that the Defendant’s refusal of enlistment according to one’s religious conscience does not constitute “justifiable cause” under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act.

4. Judgment of the court below

A. The relevant legal doctrine’s refusal to perform military training and bearing arms on the ground of a genuine conscience decision based on a religious, ethical, moral, philosophical, or similar motive formed inside his own inner premises constitutes “justifiable cause” under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act.

Here, conscience as referred to in this article is devout, firm, and true.

The belief deep means that it is a depth of a person's inner sense and it affects all his thoughts and actions.

The whole of life, which is not a part of the life, must be under the influence of its belief.

The belief that it is firm means that it is not flexible or variable.

Although it is not necessarily a fixed change, the belief has a clear substance, and it should not be easily changed as it is.

It means that the belief that it is true is not false, but is neither compromise nor strategic depending on circumstances.

Even if the conscientious objectors are devout and firm.